Orissa

Jajapur

CC/102/2021

Ganeswar Sahoo - Complainant(s)

Versus

Canara Bank,D.P.Code No-3364,Duburi Branch. - Opp.Party(s)

Badri Narayan Panda

09 Feb 2023

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : JAJPUR : ODISHA .

Consumer Complaint No. 102 / 2021.

Date of filing Complaint   :-     07.09.2021.

Date of Order                   :-     09.02.2023.

Dated the 9^th day of February 2023.

Ganeswar Sahoo, S/o:- Late Natabar Sahoo,

At:- Bartanda, Po:- Atta, P.S:- Sukinda,

Dist:- Jajpur (Odisha) Pin-755018.                           .  .  .  .  Complainant.                                                                                                                                     

                             Versus.

 

Canara Bank, D.P. Code No.-3364,

Duburi Branch, Jajpur,

Dist:- Jajpur, Pin-755026.​

 

P R E S E N T S.

                   1.    Smt. Susmita Mishra,    President,

                   2.    Sri Bibekananda Das,       Member (I/c).

 

             Counsels appeared for the parties.                           

For the Complainant        :-     Sri Badri Narayan Panda, Advocate, 

For the Opp. Party            :-     Sri Satya Prakash Behuria, Advocate.

 

J U D G M E N T.

Mrs.  SUSMITA MISHRA, PRESIDENT  :-

            The above named Complainant filed a complaint petition with documents against the above named O.P. under Consumer Protection Act, 2019 with allegation stated therein.  He also filed another petition seeking interim order on the ground stated therein. Learned advocate appears on behalf of the O.P. and submits, his client is the O.P. namely ‘Canara Bank’.  Recovery under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (in short SARFAESI Act, 2002) was commenced by his client against the complainant.

            On perusal of record, it is observed that complainant has mentioned in Para-7 of the complaint petition that due to stop payment of EMI stopped the account marked as N.P.A., the authorized officer of Canara Bank, issued a letter/demand Notice U/s 13(2) of SARFAESI Act, 2002 dt.08.04.2021 and also mentioned in Para-4 of the petition of the complainant vide Ref. No. CNB/DUB/RECALL/02/2021 Dated 05.04.2021 (Xerox copy of Annexure-1) & (vide Ref. No. 3364261000006, 3364746000001, 3364766000002 & 33674000004/ dtd. 08.04.2021) (Xerox copy of Annexure-2).

            Therefore, it is evident that O.P. Bank had initiated proceedings under SARFAESI Act against the complainant prior to filing of the consumer complaint.  It is clearly mentioned in Sec. 100 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 which is lays down the provision of this Act. Shall be in addition to and not in derogation of that the provision of any other law for the time being in force. 

            Various Tribunals constituted under the statute are expected to exercise their jurisdiction in accordance with the provisions of the Act under which they have been constituted.  There is a clear cut demarcation of the jurisdiction & powers amongst various Tribunals & no attempt should be made by one Tribunal to usurp the powers & jurisdiction of other directly or indirectly.   In this regards, when the Consumer Disputes Redressal Agencies assume jurisdiction in respect of matters falling exclusively with the jurisdiction of Tribunals established under the Railway Claim Tribunal Act, 1987, [Chairman, Thiruvalluvar Transport Corporation Vs. Consumer Protection Council. (1995) ICPR 371 (SC)] or

Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets & Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ( the SARFAESI Act, 2002) [INDO Pacific Housing Fin. Ltd. Vs. Gopal Shetty (2014) II CPJ 638 (NCDRC)  or similar other enactments that would certainly be in derogation of the provisions of any other law, which is not permissible.

            There are plethora judgments passed by Hon’ble National Commission where it is observed that the civil court or any other authority cannot arrogate to itself the right to make decisions or interfere with the SARFAESI Act.,2002.

            In this connection, we can rely upon the case law passed in Shib Shankar  Lal Gupta Vs. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. & Ors reported in II (2013) CPJ 56 (N.C.), wherein the Hon’ble National Commission held that

“when the proceeding of SARFAESI is started by O.P.-Bank or when the case is pending under SARFAESI Act, 2002, civil court as well as Consumer Forum has no power to entertain case/suit/ proceeding as per Sec. 34 of SARFAESI Act, 2002.”

 

            In an another Landmark judgment passed by Hon’ble National Commission in Bank of Baroda Vs. M/s Geeta Foods decided on 08.11.2012/ R.P. No.3499/2012,

“As per Sec.34 of SARFAESI Act the Consumer Commission has no power to interfere when the notice has been issued under SARFAESI Act.”              

            Hence, the recent decision of the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission,  in Sudipta Saha Vs. L.I.C. Housing Finance Ltd. & Ors, 2022 (2) CPR 101 (W.B.), wherein the Hon’ble West Bengal State Consumer Commission has laid down that :                

“ i) Right to make decision :- Civil Court or any other authority cannot arrogate to itself the right to make decisions or interfere with the SARFAESI Act.  The Sec.34 of SARFAESI Act.

ii)  SARAFAESI Act :- As per Sec. 34 of SARFAESI Act the Consumer Commission has no power to interfere when the notice has been issued under the SARFAESI Act.”

Similarly, in case of Bank of India Vs. Anil Raveendran, 2015 (2) CPR 41 (N.C.), the Hon’ ble National Commission New Delhi, held that –

“ Foras have no jurisdiction to entertain complaint in view of Sec.34 of SARFAESI Act.”

In the light of the above settled position in law, we are of the opinion that this Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint in view of Sec.34 of SARFAESI Act.

Hence, the present petition having no merits is hereby dismissed.  The present complaint petition is disposed of accordingly.  Pending application, if any, shall stand disposed of.  Parties are left to bear their own costs.

Issue extract of the order to the parties for compliance.

order pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 9^th day of February 2023.